Whats the best 35mm lens for shooting film?

Leica M5, Ultron-M 35mm f/1.7 chrome, 400-2TMY.

Very nice lens, very sharp (this is at full aperture) and zero distortion. Much handier than the Zeiss f/1.4 I would say.

Erik.

24380497380_bc4293ddaa_c.jpg
 
The 35 Biogon-C is almost perfect for daytime outdoor use.
Go inside and you are also going to want a 35/1.4 - especially if you don't want to change mid roll to a pushed / higher ISO film.
Having both is the perfect long term plan.

Why both ?
The ZM 35/2.8 is incredibly small and technically near perfect.
35/1.4s are either bulky or less corrected and characterful.

I built up to three 35mm lenses over the years :
35/2 Summicron IV ( soft wide open - sold/traded for below )
35/1.4 ASPH ( pre FLE ) - great wide open but flares
Voigtlander 35/2.5 ( bought to accompany flaring above - good but sold for below )
ZM 35/2.8 - sharp, distortion and flare free
MS 35/1.4 - tiny, fun - oozes character but not for pixel peepers.
 
I'm probably the only one here who isn't a fan of the Leica 35mm Summicron ASPH. I always found it rendered too "heavy" for my tastes in B&W. Maybe it's because I never mastered it. Been shying away from the Zeiss look too, as mentioned above, find it too "modern", too "spot on sharp", and a bit too "snappy" for my tastes.

Have fallen hard for the W-Nikkor-C 3.5cm f2.5 of late. Find it renders on Kodak Double-XX just as I imagine.

Best,
-Tim
 
Thank you guys for all of your infos, maybe (just maybe) i should have added that all i have to spend is a grand :D
 
Richard G said:
Of course there isn't just one. I like this C Biogon very much, but also enjoy my version 4 Summicron. The latter is tiny. Tinier still is the f3.5 Summaron. I like the results I've had with Ektar and black and white with that 1950 lens.
Click to expand...

I don't have a Summicron, but I have the C Biogon and a 35/3.5 Summaron and I concur that both are great, if very different lenses.
 
Whats the best 35mm lens for shooting film?

Having bought my first Leica (M2) back in January, I did a bunch of online research on 35mm lenses at the cheaper end of the scale. In the end I went with the CV 2.5 color skopar PCII because of its all round performance, great price and I've no need for bokeh balls - I prefer portraits in context. My first roll through the M2 was Ektar, incidentally also the first time shooting that stock. Very happy with the results such as this portrait which is a straight from the lab Naritsu scan with not a touch of post.
 
I have owned lots of 35mm lenses including the CV 35f2.5, CV 35f1.2 and Zeiss 35f2.8. They all are great. I think it would come down to speed and size. I really like the 35f1.2 except when I am on a hiking trip. The Zeiss was with me during hiking in Scotland and Spain on the M9 a couple years ago. I bought it cause I did not want to lug the 35f1.2 through the hills of Scotland.

As has been said earlier, most 35's made today are great. It comes down to size, handling and cost more then sharpness, flare resistance or bokeh (still trying to decide what the hell that means).

If you live within distance of a good camera store, try to handle as many samples of different lenses as you can.
 
Everyone has their favourites as you can see.

The best 35mm lens for your Leica is the one that is fast enough to get the shots you want, small enough to carry, affordable enough to buy, delivers the images you want, and feels good ergonomically.

What's wrong with the C-Biogon?
Is it too slow? Look at the CV 1.7/35
Too small? Look at the 2/35 Biogon
Too expensive? Look at the CV 2.5/35
Not good ergonomically? Look at the CV 1.7/35 or 2.5/35
Don't like the images? Look at the 2.8/35 sumamron

If you're shooting black and white, you have so many other variables that contribute the the final image, so if you don't like the images from the C-Biogon (which is a mighty fine lens), then maybe start different films/development/printing options.
 
Had a few in my time. The 35 summicron (think mine's a v2 or 3 no matter) has proven the best allrounder - esp. Nice balance between size and quality.

Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk
 
stillshunter said:
Had a few in my time. The 35 summicron (think mine's a v2 or 3 no matter) has proven the best allrounder - esp. Nice balance between size and quality.

Sent from my C6903 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yep, my v2 is definitely the best all-rounder 35 I've owned. Tiny lens, awesome ergonomics, stunning image quality.
 
papo said:
Thank you guys for all of your infos, maybe (just maybe) i should have added that all i have to spend is a grand :D
Click to expand...

For a grand you can get any of the Voigtlander 35's. Of them the one that seems the best compromise in terms of performance, size, speed, cost, is the Ultron 35/1.7. The Nokton f/1.2 is too big/heavy. The Nokton f/1.4 is nicely compact but it lags behind in performance. The Skopar f/2.5 is really good but, personally, I'd get it only after I had a fast 35. So there. :angel:

.
 
Interesting. I'm also looking at third 35 under 1K$. To replace my third CV CS which does job well but has no performance, hint, spark, pinch and so on. I wish, I like Biogon C, but it has bad ergonomics for me, while rendering is nice. Ultrons, both LTM and ZM are well alive lenses on BW, but, againg no tab. And the only lens which I'm finding to be worth to try under 1K$ is .... Nokton 35 1.4 :). Lens with performance.
 
I've used the following 35mm lenses for film and a few of them for digital as well:
Canon Serenar 35mm f/2.8
Canon 35mm f/2
Voigtlander 35mm f/1.7
Leica Summaron 35mm f/3.5
Leica Summicron 35mm f/2
Leica Summilux 35mm f/1.4 V2
Komura 35mm f/2.8
Nikon 3.5cm f/2.5
Nikon 3.5cm f/1.8
Jupiter 12
Konica UC Hexanon 35mm f/2

Now, all of these are excellent lenses, as are all of the lenses that have previously been mentioned so you're only getting opinions from folks who prefer a lens for one reason or another, but none is the "best."
In my opinion though, my favorite of all these lenses is the UC Hexanon. I should have never sold it but life goes on.

Phil Forrest
 
I prefer the Zeiss Biogon 35/2.0 ZM personally.

I've tried the following over the course of several years:

Zeiss Biogon 35/2.0 ZM
Leica Summicron 35/2.0 ASPH
Leica Summicron 35/2.0 "King of Bokeh"
Leica Summilux 35/1.4 ASPH FLE
Voigtlander 35/1.4 Nokton Classic
 
Probably it depends the result I\m aiming for. For classic, vintage mood, I like Elmar 35mm f3.5(LTM) Not that sharp but give a very classic mood I like.

Otherwise, I go for either Summicron or Summaron, pretty sharp lenses.


On SLR, normally go for Rolleiflex QBM 35mm Distagon. Normally use it on my Rolleiflex SL35e but also on the Canon EOS 6d.

Regards

Marcelo
 
Some I've owned or used...

Favorite: Zeiss C-Biogon 2.8 - just a great great lens for the money and the last M 35mm I had ever owned.

Zeiss Biogon f/2 - perfectly fine but a little larger than I liked for a 35mm M lens

Cheap: CV 2.5 - great size and price, but kind of generic

CV 1.4 Nokton... great size and speed... but can show focus shift.

CV 35mm 1.7 ... underrated.
35mm Elmar 3.5 ... tiny and very old fashioned in results. Interesting when used on digital.

35mm summaron 2.8... excellent low contrast lens for color

MS optical 35mm 3.5... tiny and cool, but expensive for the quality.

Borrowed: Nikon 35mm f1.8 LTM lens... magical wide open. However, focuses the opposite way to M lenses.

Canon 35mm f/2 - Overrated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom